Mechanical switches have long been used to control apparatus of all types, including household appliances, machine tools, automobiles and related systems, and all sorts of other domestic and industrial equipment. Mechanical switches are typically mounted on a substrate and require some type of penetration through the substrate. These penetrations, as well as penetrations in the switch itself, can allow dirt, water and other contaminants to pass through the substrate or become trapped within the switch, thus leading to electrical shorts and other malfunctions.
Touch switches are often used to replace conventional mechanical switches. Unlike mechanical switches, touch switches contain no moving parts to break or wear out. Moreover, touch switches can be mounted or formed on a continuous substrate sheet, i.e. a switch panel, without the need for openings in the substrate. The use of touch switches in place of mechanical switches can therefore be advantageous, particularly in environments where contaminants are likely to be present. Touch switch panels are also easier to clean than typical mechanical switch panels because they can be made without openings in the substrate that would allow penetration of contaminants.
Known touch switches typically comprise a touch pad having one or more electrodes. The touch pads communicate with control or interface circuits which are often complicated and remote from the touch pads. A signal is usually provided to one or more of the electrodes comprising the touch pad, creating an electric field about the affected electrodes. The control/interface circuits detect disturbances to the electric fields and cause a response to be generated for use by a controlled device.
Although touch switches solve many problems associated with mechanical switches, known touch switch designs are not perfect. For example, many known touch switches can malfunction when contaminants such as water or other liquids are present on the substrate. The contaminant can act as a conductor for the electric fields created about the touch pads, causing unintended switch actuations. This presents a problem in areas where such contaminants are commonly found, such as a kitchen and some factory environments.
Existing touch switch designs can also suffer from problems associated with crosstalk, i.e., interference between the electric fields about adjacent touch pads. Crosstalk can cause the wrong touch switch to be actuated or can cause two switches to be actuated simultaneously by a touch proximate a single touch pad.
Many known touch switch designs are also susceptible to unintended actuations due to electrical noise or other interferences affecting a touch pad itself, or the leads extending from the touch pad to its associated control circuit. This problem can be aggravated in applications where the touch pad is a relatively large distance away from the control circuitry, as is frequently the case with conventional touch switch designs.
Existing touch switch designs commonly require complicated control circuits in order to interface with the devices they control. These control circuits are likely to be comprised of a large number of discrete components which occupy considerable space on a circuit board. Because of their physical size, the control circuits are typically located at a substantial distance from the touch pads themselves. The physical size of the control/interface circuits and their remoteness from the touch pads can aggravate many of the problems discussed above, such as crosstalk and susceptibility to electrical noise and interference. The size and remoteness also complicate the overall touch switch panel design, resulting in increased production cost and complexity.
Some known touch switch designs require a separate grounding lead from the touch pad to the interface/control circuit or to the controlled device. Certain apparatus utilizing conventional mechanical switches do not require, and may not readily accommodate, such grounding leads. Adapting such apparatus for use with such touch switches can require the addition of special grounding provisions, thus increasing design and production time, complexity, and cost. These ground lead requirements can preclude simple, direct replacement of conventional mechanical switch panels with touch switch panels.
Recent improvements in touch switch design include techniques which lower the input and output impedance of the touch switch itself, thereby making it highly immune to false actuations due to contaminants and external noise sources. U.S. Pat. No. 5,594,222 describes a low impedance touch switch design which is less susceptible to malfunction in the presence of contaminants and electrical noise than many previous designs. Even though this approach has several advantages over the prior art, there are some attributes that may limit its application. For instance, the resulting touch switch may be sensitive to temperature variations. As long as the temperature variations at the output are small relative to legitimate signal changes and are small relative to signal variations induced by transistor variations, then a single transistor or other amplifying device will be quite satisfactory. However, this technique may require the use of additional circuitry to interface with the controlled device, thus increasing cost and complexity to the overall touch switch design. In applications where there is little dynamic range to allow for compensation, and where temperature changes are significant relative to legitimate signal changes, a different approach may be better able to eliminate or reduce the effects of temperature.
Also, even though the low impedance approach of this technique can differentiate between contaminants with some finite amount of impedance and a human touch with some finite amount of impedance, this technique may not be enough to differentiate between extremely low levels of impedance. Such a situation could exist when an entire touch switch (i.e., both the inner and outer electrode) is covered with a large amount of contaminant. A similar, essentially zero-impedance, situation could exist when a conductive material, such as a metal pan, entirely covers a touch switch.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,310,611, assigned to the same assignee as the present application, and hereby incorporated by reference herein, discloses a touch switch apparatus having a differential measuring circuit which addresses many of the problems related to common mode disturbances affecting touch switches. For example, a touch switch having a two-electrode touch pad can be configured to generate an electric field about each electrode. A common mode disturbance, such as a contaminant substantially covering both electrodes, is likely to affect the electric field about each of the electrodes substantially equally. Each electrode provides a signal proportional to the disturbance to the differential measuring circuit. Since the signals from the electrodes are therefore contemplated to be substantially equal, the differential measuring circuit does not sense a differential and does not respond to the common mode disturbance. On the other hand, if the field about only one of the electrodes is disturbed, the signal provided by that electrode to the differential measuring circuit will likely be substantially different than that provided by the other, non-affected electrode. The differential circuit can respond by providing an output based on the different degrees of stimulation at the first and second electrodes, which can cause a switch actuation based upon the particular stimulation state of the electrodes or can provide information based on many stimulation states at the electrodes.
Although the differential measuring circuit approach addresses many problems known in the prior art, it is relatively complex and can be costly to design and manufacture. A differential measuring circuit typically comprises many more parts than a more conventional control circuit. The additional parts are likely to take up more space on a touch switch panel. As such, the control circuit is likely to be even farther from the touch pad than it might be with a non-differential circuit design, requiring long leads between the touch pad and its control circuit. This can actually aggravate concerns related to electrical interference. Furthermore, when building a differential measuring circuit, matching of components becomes important. Proper component matching presents an additional manufacturing burden and is likely to add cost. Also, when using differential sensing techniques, the resulting signals are relatively small compared to the dynamic range of absolute signal changes of the electrodes, especially in low impedance applications. The resulting signal therefore can be affected by noise and other environmental effects. Proper buffering of the differential signal would typically require the use of additional components to construct a switch or a buffer. Further, when a stimulus such as a pulse signal is applied from a remote control circuit, the pulse signal may be affected. Stimulus generating circuits such as pulse generating circuits typically require many components and occupy physical space that could interfere with the sensing electrodes. Therefore, the signal generating circuits need to be physically located remote from the sensing electrodes if they occupy physical space that can inadvertently affect or bias the sensing electrodes, which would effectively reduce the signal to noise ratio performance of the sensor.
Although the foregoing improvements can reduce unintended switch actuations as a result of crosstalk between switches and the effects of electrical interference on their control circuits, they do not eliminate these problems completely. Also, they do not address the need for separate grounding circuits in certain touch switch applications or resolve the concerns related thereto. Furthermore, it would be advantageous if the aforementioned features could be implemented using as small a physical structural form as possible.
Typically, actuation of a field effect sensor requires neither application of force nor physical displacement of a structural member by a user, as would be the case with, for example, a mechanical push button, toggle, or rotary switch. While this is a desirable attribute in many applications, in other applications it can be desirable for a user to apply force to or physically displace a switch member in order to give the user the physical perception that the switch has changed state. In certain application, it would be desirable to provide a switching mechanism having the advantages offered by field effect sensors, while retaining the mechanical feel of a conventional mechanical switch.